The subject of this Article is suggested by a single question: How would we regulate searches and seizures if the Fourth Amendment did not exist? This question is a useful one to ask even leaving aside the possibility of ...

My focus will be on the extent to which the Constitution limits government surveillance activities. The details of regulation should be statutory, but the basis for that statutory regulation must be founded on constitutional ...

In More Essential Than Ever: The Fourth Amendment in the Twenty-First Century, Stephen Schulhofer provides a strong, popularized brief for interpreting the Fourth Amendment as a command that judicial review precede all ...

This Article reports an attempt to investigate empirically
important aspects of the Fourth Amendment to the United States
Constitution, as construed by the United States Supreme Court. In
the course of doing so, it ...

Professor Slobogin examines recent Supreme Court decisions involving standing to challenge search and seizure violations, and argues that the Court's commitment to a "totality of the circumstances" approach has permitted ...

Courts and scholars have devoted considerable attention to the definition of probable cause and reasonable suspicion. Since the demise of the “mere evidence rule” in the 1960s, however, they have rarely examined how these ...

In the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Jones, a majority of the Justices appeared to recognize that under some circumstances aggregation of information about an individual through governmental surveillance ...

This essay, written for the Sixth Annual LatCrit conference, explores the subterranean motifs of current rules regulating searches and seizures by the police. More specifically, it investigates whether and to what extent ...

In the history of the Supreme Court, William Rehnquist may have been the least friendly justice toward the view that the Fourth Amendment should be read expansively. Even he, however, might have interpreted the amendment ...